I did not mean to come across as sarcastic, sorry if that is how my comment is perceived, it was not my intention. You said you wrote books on the topic, feel free to link them, here or in PM, I am quite interested. 

Foundations of quantum mechanics are hard: there has been very little progress since 1930s, so "shut up and calculate" is a safe bet. Just to list some developments in the area: Everette's Many Worlds, Bell's inequalities, Zurek's decoherence/einselection and... and... no, I can't think of anything else. And none of those are any close to solving the mystery of the Born rule. At least einselection describes how only the eigenstates (pointer states) survive. It does not tell you how to get from there to observations. Most reasonable proponents of MWI readily agree that there is no mechanical way to derive the Born rule from the Schrodinger equation, though it has been well established that it is the only rule that makes sense provided we use probabilities to describe possible outcomes. 

Again, calling something you dislike by a connotation-loaded name like "theocracy" is unlikely to help you in your quest to... what is your quest, anyway?

As an aside, I suspect that further progress in the area will involve gravity in some way. Most likely emergent classical gravity, not a fundamental gravitational force like you see falling out of the string theory equations, or loop quantum gravity equations. The only "quantum" gravity that is likely to survive is the perturbative calculation, where you quantize small perturbations on a fixed spacetime background and get gravitons, sort of like you get phonons when quantizing small perturbation in a condensed matter system. Of course, this is no more than speculation.